Jump to content

Talk:Georgia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 118.90.87.154 (talk) at 10:58, 22 February 2010 (→Index of archived arguments: WP:GOOGLE now points to a page on Google the search engine.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconDisambiguation
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles
WikiProject iconGeorgia (U.S. state) Disambig‑class
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles
DisambigThis disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do:
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconGeorgia (country) Disambig‑class
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) articles
DisambigThis disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

English speakers are guilty of this.

... and French speakers, and German speakers, and Greek speakers (who'd rather call Sakartvelo "Georgia" istead of the old Greek name "Iviria" (Iberia)) and so on. Basically there is a standard in all these languages, for a reason that I fail to understand to call Sakartvelo "Georgia". Why? Apart from considering St. George protector of Sakartvelo, Sakartvelo never made any claim that they are the "real" Georgia and not the US state. They basically accepted the international situation, in which their state is called "Georgia".

What they specifically DON'T like though is to be called Gruzins and their country Gruzinya using Russian words. So basically if US Georgians want to solve this, it's simple: English is your leanguage: stop calling Sakartvelo "Georgia" and start calling it "Sakartvelo". Why did you call it Georgia in the first place I find hard to imagine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.124.35.173 (talk) 20:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right. However, English WP needs to cater to English speaking Americans too :p The thing boils down to whether an English-speaking USA guy will recognize (or probably tolerate) Georgia as a country across the Atlantic. It seems not! 118.90.85.8 (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The country across the Atlantic is called Sakartvelo, as the user pointed out. Why would an American want to call it Georgia? Are we so vain that we now call other countries after US states? Hmm, the Greeks don't liek the country of Macedonia being called that, so let's call it Montana. And we can call, England - New New York, Germany can be Pensylvania, Sweden can be California, and so on. That way we won't be intolerant, and want to use the names in our country only for places in our country. Makes a lot of sense. - BilCat (talk) 05:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why would an American want to call it Georgia? Are we so vain that we now call other countries after US states?
Are you under the impression that this is the American Wikipedia? It's isn't. It's the English-language Wikipedia, and "Georgia" is the country's official English-language name. —David Levy 06:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you under the impression I'm so stupid as to not know that? Evidentlyv not so. And English is not the country's official language. If it were, you'd have a point. - BilCat (talk) 07:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1. I haven't questioned your intelligence, but I'm unaware of your degree of knowledge on this subject. You pondered "Why would an American want to call it Georgia?" and referred to the concept of "call[ing] other countries after US states," and that's what I'm addressing.
2. The language spoken in the country is irrelevant. This is the English-language Wikipedia, and the country is called "Georgia" in the English language. Our goal is to guide our readers to their intended destinations, and many people typing "Georgia" seek the country's article. —David Levy 07:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was writing a tongue-in-cheek response to the previous post. The user said, "The thing boils down to whether an English-speaking USA guy will recognize (or probably tolerate) Georgia as a country across the Atlantic. It seems not!" As an American, I have no problem with another country being called Georgia! - BilCat (talk) 07:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay; thanks for clarifying. —David Levy 07:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are wrong. Their own English name for themselves is Georgia. See also their constitution (Article I: 'Georgia shall be the name of Georgia.') or the fact the suffix on all those websites is .ge. Relax. -LlywelynII (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Index of archived arguments

(Feel free to edit this. Perhaps this section can be spun off to a subpage or the Georgia talk header? Also, can someone go through the "Substantial discussions" 1/11, 2/6, 2/14, 2/16 and the move proposals M4 and M5 and index them?)

References are in the format Archive no./section no. "M" stands for "Move discussion". Examples:

The enumeration of this list is not intended to indicate the strength or importance of the points but simply to make references to this list easier. Points may be repeated depending on the context in which they appear in the archive.

  1. Pro country
    1. WP:CSB and "Georgia" in English (1/1 Irpen, Carl Kenner WP:CSB, 1/3, 1/4, 3/6 and talks about but does not mention WP:CSB, 3/4, M2 Joffeloff mentions WP:CSB), US centrism (1/13).
    2. WP:NC general audience: the US state is a specialist topic. (3/4)
    3. The Caucasian Georgia is a sovereign state/raises status of US state to sovereign state. (1/2, 3/4)
    4. English WP is out of step. (1/7)
    5. WP:IAR (2/12)
    6. Importance (M2 SJK)
    7. Pro-US side are holding this page to ransom (1/11)
  2. Pro US state
    1. Economy, population etc. larger., country is obscure. (2/9, 3/1)
    2. "There would be no net benefit from the proposed move". (3/3)
    3. "Georgia" in English (1/3, 1/4, 1/11 The User Formerly, 3/6, 2/11), more US readers (1/1 StarryEyes, Raggaga, 4.89.243.64 and more)
    4. "On an English-language wikipedia, an English-language jurisdiction with a larger population should not be subservient to a country that has only been independent for 15 years and doesn't speak English. A disambiguation page is an appropriate compromise." (1/1 Kirjtc2)
  3. Keep the dab page
    1. M2 Earthliberator
    2. WP:NPOV if both topics are of equal magnitude, WP shouldn't say which is more important. (1/2 radiojon, 1/11 zoney)
    3. Let users find what they are looking for (1/2)
  4. Other (for either side or none)
    1. WP:STAT, Notability, traffic data, WP:GOOGLETEST (1/5, 1/11, 1/12, 2/5, 2/10, 2/11, 3/4). (WP:GOOGLETEST not explicitly mentioned on those pages.)
    2. "Georgia" in English. (1/1 raggaga, 1/3, 1/4, 1/15)
    3. WP:IAR (2/12)
    4. WP:NC titles not based on subjects' importance. (2/11 agrees, 2/14 disagrees, 3/4, 3/7)
    5. WP:PLACE (in general) (1/2)
    6. WP:PLACE and Comparable cases: Macedonia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Turkey, China, Formosa (compared with Argentina), San Marino, Azerbaijan. (1/1 Llundun, 1/17, 2/2, 3/6, 3/7, M2 Bkell et al. Luxembourg, Azerbaijan, WP:PLACE, 3/8 touched at 3/4)
    7. WP:NC common name. (3/6)
    8. WP:DAB is (just) a guideline. (2/14)
    9. Leave it as it is (2/13), dead horse. (3/6 talks about but does not mention WP:LETGO)
    10. The "correct name is just Georgia, so any additional text should clearly be disambiguation text" (M3 Michael Z)
    11. The choice is not a statement on the value of the two Georgias (M2 Sosomk)
    12. The country is indeed more important, but that doesn't mean that the country's page on WP should get priority naming (1/11)
  5. Miscellaneous Wikipedia-dependent issues
    1. Hatnotes etc. (2/8)
    2. "[[Georgia (country)|]] is easier than [[Republic of Georgia|Georgia]]" (M3 Henrygb)
  6. Substantial discussions 1/11 (particularly difficult), 2/6, 2/14, 2/16 No Consensus

As an aside, this debate has been going on for about five years now. 118.90.57.67 (talk) 00:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't a clue how to interpret the above. Anyway, I'm now conviced it's time to propose that the state be the primary topic, as it clearly is. See the "Georgian" article on the state proof that even the Georgians accept it. - BilCat (talk) 04:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"References are in the format Archive no./section no.", e.g. "1/12" is archive 1, section 12. 118.90.111.248 (talk) 07:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just link to the sections? That would make it easier to use, wouldn't it? BilCat (talk) 07:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. 118.90.111.248 (talk) 07:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks! - BilCat (talk) 07:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the list is proving its worth already: the conversation below contains absolutely no new arguments :D. 10... 20... 30 GOTO 10 ! 118.90.38.95 (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, basically

Arguments pro-country:

  • Georgia is a sovereign state, that way it has more importance than a subdivision.
  • Georgia has a 3000 year history, and it has been a nation much longer than the state.
  • Historically, Georgia has been very important on world scale, unlike the state whose international importance has been tied to the overall importance of the United States.
  • Georgia has more hits and page views than the state.
  • Georgia would counter the Systemic Bias present in Wikipedia.

Arguments pro-state:

  • Georgia is bigger and has more population.

Just placed my little piece of sand. --186.136.40.74 (talk) 21:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's pretty one-sided, typical of proponents of the country not actually called Georgia in it's own language, and typical of systemic anti-US bias. Laughable - BilCat (talk) 03:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Next, we'll have people from other countries telling Americans they can't call themselves Americans, cause it's also the name of a (double) continent they are from. Wait, they already do that! - BilCat (talk) 03:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Historically, Georgia has been very important on world scale" I'm just curious, 186.136.40.74, what exactly do you feel made Georgia so very important on a global scale??? As far as I can tell, Georgia's been something of a back-water for most of its history - at the margins of (and often a province of) larger empires and outside any of the major historical centers of civilization. 84.138.199.46 (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, and the state of Georgia has ever been such a dominant global power, has it? :) Please think in the best interest of the Wikipedia. Stats show that Georgia (country) is clearly more sought after than the state, and it should be made the primary topic. That's all we're here for, not to pass judgement on who is better than whom. —what a crazy random happenstance 17:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The user was inquiring about the validity of a specific assertion. Even if there were absolutely no doubt that the country, rather than the state, should be the primary topic, there's nothing at all wrong with asking "Is this a true statement about the country's importance?" It must be very easy for you to make your decisions if you never question anything you're told. Propaniac (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mainspace talk pages are not the appropriate venue to discuss arbitrary perceptions of "importance", nor are they an appropriate place to attack users. Please remain civil and on topic. —what a crazy random happenstance 12:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WACRH, nobody was being un-civil or off-topic or, by any stretch of the imagination, making a personal attack. Rather, the specific assertion that the country known in English as Georgia "has been very important on world scale" was called into question. This assertion was put forward as an argument for moving the country article here, so the validity of that statement is quite relevant. As far as I can tell though, nobody has yet put forth any evidence to support the idea of Georgia being "very important on world scale." 84.138.236.205 (talk) 13:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Culture of Georgia spans 5000 years, and it is of utter imporance because of spreading christianity on the Caucasus and central Asia. Please read History of Georgia. However, how does the state of georgia been important at a world scale? --190.226.50.130 (talk) 19:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above would be relevant if "subjects' importance" were included in our article name criteria (which it is not). —David Levy 20:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not so basically -- "Is there a primary topic?"

There is no consensus on which use of Georgia is the primary one. Hence this disambiguation page and years of debate, voting etc .. All the relevant (and not so relevant) arguments have been made, but apparently some folks dont bother to read the colored boxes on this page (above) to see the many move proposals and archived discussions, nor even the nutshell summary (above). So it's worth repeating what another editor quoted in Archive 3, from WP:DISAMBIG > WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: "If there is extended discussion about which article truly is the primary topic, that may be a sign that there is in fact no primary topic." PrBeacon (talk) 00:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conversation needs more numbers, less US/anti bias

As of 21 Feb 2010, wiki has 12776 articles linked to Georgia (country) and 23251 to Georgia (U.S. state). Via this. Google trends shows general English language usage isn't even close. Meanwhile, people seem to look at the Georgia (country) page more often (presumably because they're less familiar with it:) assuming [1] is a reliable source, you get

Georgia_(U.S._state) has been viewed 99243 times in 201001. This article ranked 3728 in traffic on en.wikipedia.org
Georgia_(country) has been viewed 130885 times in 201001. This article ranked 1934 in traffic on en.wikipedia.org

So, yeah, I'd say it's fair to say they're both very common and there's no primary topic. -LlywelynII (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Almost twice as many articles link to the state as to the country? All other factors being near equal, I'd say this is a clear tipping point in the state's favor as being the primary topic here. After all, the links in other articles are the main use of the article titles. Btw, the Google trends chart means absolutely nothing to me. Can you summarize? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Georgia&oldid=345640771"